Demos et al,

So you think there isn't enough public involvement in decision making.

Please do enlighten me as to your opinion on the average voters economic literacy, understanding of foreign affairs, logistical or organisational understanding, large scale service delivery experience etc.

What you suggest is ridiculous. If you bothered to note opinion polls at all you would see that people change their minds about important issues every day, often on the basis of inanities like the married status of a politicians child.

If we were to base policy on this kind of democracy we would be stopping and starting every second day. We couldn't organise ANYTHING more than a couple of weeks in advance because there is no way of predicting public support for ANY venture that far into the future.

Representative democrcay isn't a perfect system but the alternatives are SO BAD it doesn't bear thinking about.]

Pelican,

Pelican >> “As a child of the 60s and the 70s I do miss the passion of that time and observing the will of the people as they took to the streets on many an occasion to protest against Vietnam, the Franklin, nuclear testing etal.”

That generation were no more politically aware than today’s generation. The vast majority of protesters of that generation were bandwagon jumpers who were participating in the latest teen fad. Turning up at a demo and shouting slogans didn’t actually require an understanding of the political situation; it was enough to know which side you were on and what catchphrases to use.

I think this is more than clearly underlined by that generations’ political views and participation today. They are the MOST selfish generation we have seen in Australia so far, although the pampering of their kids means they will pass that particular baton on. I think it is an obvious conclusion to draw that the hippie generation were never truly interested in politics outside their own narrow self interest.

Paul, I agree it is not possible for all issues to be decided by the people. Our system accepts that when a party is voted in they govern on our behalf based on the policies they promoted pre-election but the system can be improved upon and there are many issues that we, the people, are quite capable of making up our minds.

There are many areas that we can involve the public in decision making by using referendums. It would be unwieldy and expensive to hold a referendum on every issue but in the past many referendums have been held during other elections to avoid duplication of costs etc.

Referendums are not perfect as we saw in the 'Republic' version where the model put forward and the lack of choice being so manipulated as to ensure a No vote. There needs to be some regulaton to ensure the fairest outcome based on providing a selection of choices which would be heavily discussed and debated prior to the referendum being held.

The Republic referendum is just one example of a failure of democracy - where a government has already decided that it's opinion is the right one and takes steps to ensure that their will (not that of the citizens) is carried through.

Another example, was the referendum held to decide on ACT self-government. Both times the people voted NO and what happened, we got self-government. An expensive bureacracy that was not needed for such a small population and one that was previously well served by the Commonwealth Government.

This is what some of us mean by a failure of democracy which includes more transparent and open government and better access to government by ordinary citizens. And making politicians and government more accountable and more open to scrutiny. Otherwise you get facism.

Paul that is your opinion that the protestors of the 60s and 70s were bandwagon jumpers, many were committed believers in a better world and in making governments accountable for their actions (such as nuclear testing around the Bikini and Muroroa atolls and within the USA).

While I agree totally with DEMOS and the others, I think in a practical sense a good part of the focus should be on policy-makers and the huge segment of the Australian population that are professionals, such as lawyers, or the privately wealthy. Professionals and the wealthy subscribe to old politics. They are clueless and ignorant. They support statism and authority to the degree that they have been unable to think independently. These people are not widely read. They are followers who subscribe to the authority of the state and it's systems. It doesn't help that both religion and feminism have shackled free and independent thought in this country. Our political system is archaic and wasteful.

Don't take that comment to be dismissive of the op. Any of us would change this in a -heart-beat- if, or when, we have the power to do so.

In au we have elections to air our greevances. If that fails you pay money to student unions, to cause a cuffuffal.

"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

Sir Winston Churchill

and this...........

"Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.

Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few."

George Bernard Shaw

There are many more suitable quotes from many brilliant minds, but those three seems to sum it all up for me. We vote for who we think will give us the most, and the politicians try and tell us what we want to hear to get into government. What I would like to see is a bit less pointless argument just to be seen to be in opposition and a little more bipartisan agreement, but I suppose that would be seen to be weak.

I can't imagine the chaos that would result if every decision was made on the basis of a referendum. We have to have people of intelligence and education to make decisions on our behalf. I would like to see a minimum five year term for our politicians and then we might get some sensible long term planning instead of short term expedience.